\begin{table}[H] \centering
\newcolumntype{R}{>{\raggedleft\arraybackslash}X}
\newcolumntype{L}{>{\raggedright\arraybackslash}X}
\newcolumntype{C}{>{\centering\arraybackslash}X}

\caption{Angrist and Rokkanen (2015) CIA-based estimates}
\label{tab:cia_estimates}
\begin{tabularx}{\linewidth}{p{5.5cm} p{4cm} p{4cm} p{4cm}}

\toprule
{}&{CCT}&{Linear reweighting}&{Propensity score} \tabularnewline
\midrule \addlinespace[\belowrulesep]
\midrule \textbf{Economic performance}&0.269***&0.115**&0.119** \tabularnewline
&(0.101)&(0.055)&(0.051) \tabularnewline
&[0.003]&[0.037]&[0.020] \tabularnewline
&N=439/324&N=342/272&N=334/267 \tabularnewline
Equality with CCT (p-val.)&&0.180&0.184 \tabularnewline
\midrule \textbf{Human Development Index}&0.197&0.007&0.007 \tabularnewline
&(0.167)&(0.082)&(0.083) \tabularnewline
&[0.173]&[0.933]&[0.932] \tabularnewline
&N=301/264&N=198/177&N=189/177 \tabularnewline
Equality with CCT (p-val.)&&0.307&0.308 \tabularnewline
\midrule \textbf{Democracy}&0.192**&0.194**&0.185** \tabularnewline
&(0.101)&(0.096)&(0.081) \tabularnewline
&[0.043]&[0.043]&[0.024] \tabularnewline
&N=731/463&N=340/261&N=327/253 \tabularnewline
Equality with CCT (p-val.)&&0.988&0.954 \tabularnewline
\midrule \textbf{General index}&0.276***&0.182***&0.161*** \tabularnewline
&(0.105)&(0.066)&(0.054) \tabularnewline
&[0.004]&[0.006]&[0.003] \tabularnewline
&N=504/357&N=363/284&N=352/276 \tabularnewline
Equality with CCT (p-val.)&&0.446&0.330 \tabularnewline
\bottomrule \addlinespace[\belowrulesep]

\end{tabularx}
\\ \parbox{\linewidth}{\footnotesize \caption*{\footnotesize \emph{Notes}: This table compares our baseline estimates from \cite{cctECMA2014} (in the ''CCT'' column) to CIA-based estimates from \cite{angristRokkanen}: a linear reweighting estimator discussed by \cite{kline2011oaxaca} (in the ''Linear reweighting'' column), and a version of the \cite{hirano2003efficient} propensity score estimator (in the ''Propensity score'' column). Standard errors are reported in parentheses, and p-values are reported in brackets. We also report the number of observations on the left and right of the cutoff within the CCT-optimal bandwidth for the \cite{cctECMA2014} estimates and the number of observations on the left and right of the cutoff in the [-pp, pp] window for the \cite{kline2011oaxaca} and \cite{hirano2003efficient} estimates. Finally, we test the equality between the CCT and CIA-based estimates using the method of \cite{clogg1995statistical}. $^{*} p<0.10,^{**} p<0.05,^{***} p<0.01$.}}
\end{table}
